Page 267 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

Chapter Conclusions

The kinds of action and change that may be produced by intentional group dialogues cover

a broad spectrum, ranging from individual learning and behavioral change to shifts in public policy

and public institutions. For the purposes of this study, I had to condense what could speak volumes

in terms of what these dialogues represent to the participants in order to complete my dissertation

whereas I see much possibility for continued study, which could be a fine prelude to a future more

in-depth, follow-up project perhaps ripe for publication. At this juncture I still wanted to note a

realm that encompasses the process of personal change that seems to occur on an individual level

as it emerges or appears as a result of these interactions. As these insights were revealed the overall

aspects and examination of personal change through participatory dialogue could only be

considered in contrast to the extent that it represents in part a larger, community-wide shift or an

impact within a cause movement. While individual changes caused by participating in a

Community Conversation is very important, beyond a time and space limitation for me to include

the possible mechanics of “self-liberation” methodology resulting they were not unfortunately the

focus of this graduate project study for two reasons. First, individual shifts in behavior as the result

of participation in facilitated dialogue have been studied elsewhere to substantive depth that I

sought to find other avenues to explore.

While there is still much to explore and some debate about how deliberation impacts

participants, there is little question among most of those who have participated in a sustained

intentional group deliberation that individual change happens. Considerably less has been

established about the capacity for small group dialogue to produce larger scale community action

and change. Second, a growing number of organizations and experts have positioned themselves

as advocates for deliberative democracy in the United States.

248